Desert Elf Endurance Changes - Discussion

[mansa]

As per https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,58287.0.html

...
The change will bring Desert Elves in line with documentation.  This means that Desert Elves will have a a lower minimum Endurance, equal to humans, and a lower maximum Endurance, slightly lower than that of humans.

To keep their running ability roughly the same, we will be increasing the stamina bonus Desert Elves get slightly.

Does this mean:
a) lower hitpoints
b) lower stun
c) lower movement points
?

[najdorf]

Will this effect current characters too, or only the new ones?

[mansa]

Brokkr — Today at 2:30 PM
I shoud note that existing characters will not be impacted, except through how their aging will work once this is live.



Question:
What if your current endurance was "25", and then the new code enters, and the new max endurance is "20".   And your character "ages" and the game decides it should go down, does it go to 19 or to 24?  (aka Do I lose 5 hit points because of aging, or do I lose 25?)

[Nao]

As I understand it, lower hitpoints and lower stun, not lower mv.

This sucks balls, though. Lower than human endurance will mean a lot of PCs with 80-90 hp. That's one unlucky hit, and delves don't have the option to stay in the city for a while until they get buff.

I feel like many of the recent changes are targeting characters than are already fairly weak in PVP (poisons becoming harder, cure nerf, now reducing delf hp) while the heavy-combat high-str ridiculousness remains untouched. These are the PCs that are actually dominating PVP.

[Fawcett]

As I understand it, lower hitpoints and lower stun, not lower mv.

This sucks balls, though. Lower than human endurance will mean a lot of PCs with 80-90 hp. That's one unlucky hit, and delves don't have the option to stay in the city for a while until they get buff.

I feel like many of the recent changes are targeting characters than are already fairly weak in PVP (poisons becoming harder, cure nerf, now reducing delf hp) while the heavy-combat high-str ridiculousness remains untouched. These are the PCs that are actually dominating PVP.

I think the run+hide was a bug being fixed, but this seems just a total nerf, yeah. Personally I wouldn't touch delf stats. They don't have INSANE endurance, just a decent endurance that they rely on.. being entirely wasteland living tribals.

[betweenford]

Feels like a bit of a weird thing to change save for balance reasons. AI delf endurance isnt really insane or anything, why not just change the incorrect helpfile?

[LindseyBalboa]

Will this keep movement points the same, or lower them? Considering mounted travel has been significantly boosted, it's a huge nerf if there is the possibility of losing movement points.

Beyond that, I don't know what problem this is actually solving. D-elves by their nature are squishy things already in actual play, and the wilderness is (thankfully) always getting more and more dangerous. I like that, the wilderness getting more dangerous.

Why nerf an entire karma-locked race to solve a problem that doesn't seem to exist in actual play?

[Nao]

Elves are both taller and heavier than humans, I don't see why they have to be super fragile to begin with.

They also don't have much weight capacity left to wear armor because their str is so low, which makes them take even more damage.

[Veselka]

If I might make a suggestion, that they have a maximum slightly higher than humans, and a minimum slightly lower than humans.

This would mean during character creation, you can decide to have a very fit elf by prioritizing endurance, but otherwise may have a lower-than-current endurance score.

I agree that 'lower than human' minimum can mean 80-90 hp desert elves which seems a bit incongruous with their survival of the fittest in the wastelands.

If anything as suggested above, i'd change the help file over the code change to desert elves, unless something seems inherently broken about them. I've always figured Desert Elves are the commandos of the wastes, and should therefore be a bit beefier than city folk, and even wastelanders that are human. Humans can choose to live a life outside -- Desert Elves have for generations only survived in the wastes, and rarely go into the cities. Plenty of human tribes have just absorbed into the cities, with some exceptions (Tan Muark, Arabet, Al'Seik come to mind) -- Some of these Desert Elf tribes have been wiped out rather than be absorbed.

Desert Elves should be forces to be reckoned with out in the wastes, and that is reflected in it being a 1 Karma role. I always figured they were a bit beefy because of the restrictions/limitations of the role in general. They tend to be antagonists, and unless they have other tribe members active at the time they are, it can also be very ISO.

I don't play D-elves often, but I figure they should have a 'gimme' in their stats, racial hide, etc.

[Brokkr]

As I understand it, lower hitpoints and lower stun, not lower mv.

This sucks balls, though. Lower than human endurance will mean a lot of PCs with 80-90 hp. That's one unlucky hit, and delves don't have the option to stay in the city for a while until they get buff.

I feel like many of the recent changes are targeting characters than are already fairly weak in PVP (poisons becoming harder, cure nerf, now reducing delf hp) while the heavy-combat high-str ridiculousness remains untouched. These are the PCs that are actually dominating PVP.

I think the run+hide was a bug being fixed, but this seems just a total nerf, yeah. Personally I wouldn't touch delf stats. They don't have INSANE endurance, just a decent endurance that they rely on.. being entirely wasteland living tribals.

Actually, Desert Elves have just 1 point of endurance less than dwarves, and their roll is MUCH better in terms of range than humans.  So yeah, INSANE.

[Brokkr]

If I might make a suggestion, that they have a maximum slightly higher than humans, and a minimum slightly lower than humans.

This would mean during character creation, you can decide to have a very fit elf by prioritizing endurance, but otherwise may have a lower-than-current endurance score.

I agree that 'lower than human' minimum can mean 80-90 hp desert elves which seems a bit incongruous with their survival of the fittest in the wastelands.

If anything as suggested above, i'd change the help file over the code change to desert elves, unless something seems inherently broken about them. I've always figured Desert Elves are the commandos of the wastes, and should therefore be a bit beefier than city folk, and even wastelanders that are human. Humans can choose to live a life outside -- Desert Elves have for generations only survived in the wastes, and rarely go into the cities. Plenty of human tribes have just absorbed into the cities, with some exceptions (Tan Muark, Arabet, Al'Seik come to mind) -- Some of these Desert Elf tribes have been wiped out rather than be absorbed.

Desert Elves should be forces to be reckoned with out in the wastes, and that is reflected in it being a 1 Karma role. I always figured they were a bit beefy because of the restrictions/limitations of the role in general. They tend to be antagonists, and unless they have other tribe members active at the time they are, it can also be very ISO.

I don't play D-elves often, but I figure they should have a 'gimme' in their stats, racial hide, etc.

1.  City elves and desert elves are the same race (we originally thought about just changing to city elf endurance...)
2.  Humans are stockier than elves.
3.  There may be an expectation, based on the old endurance, that elves are like the melee masters of the wastes, rather than the sneaky, underhanded bastards of the wastes...but why, other than just their endurance gave them hps?

[Veselka]

Personal experience over the course of 20 years playing the game? hehe

Honestly i've seen both, depending on the tribe. Long lived Desert Elves have always been a force to be reckoned with, but that's true of most long lived PCs in general.

I was always surprised at their strength and endurance, both as a player and as PCs that encountered them that weren't desert elves. But it made sense for the race, IMHO.

[Veselka]

Anecdotally though, I do remember a Sun Runner I played that had like 140hp and I felt it was a little weird.

[najdorf]

As I think more and more, it makes more sense, as long as the below is reasonable
"To keep their running ability roughly the same, we will be increasing the stamina bonus Desert Elves get slightly."

Because the confusion here is that endurance has two elements hp / movement which are contradicting to elven physical characteristics.
A dwarf with 1/4th of an elf's leg length having same movement points as elves are also insane, especially when docs are very clear that elves are strong and proud runners to the point that they find mounts having 4x their movement weak

Just to note that changes to certain gear in game (within the last years) has been an indirect nerf to d-elves

[Nao]

How does the 'stat pool'/average sum of all stats of delves compare to humans and dwarves now?

[Hauwke]

How does the 'stat pool'/average sum of all stats of delves compare to humans and dwarves now?

I'd assume similar, given that their agility is still nuts and their wisdom is higher still.

[LindseyBalboa]

Brokkr,

I thought about this and came back to my main issue. I do not think d-elves should be combat masters - maybe the odd one. They're pack animals, and they should attack in a pack, with stealth and guile, out of nowhere. That's all fine.

But it's the PVE, it's the wilderness travel, that low endurance will really make a difference at. This is a game, and it's meant to be fun. Not fair, just fun. Everyone is already putting in real life time to build up imaginary characters and play the same game with one another. Lowering d-elf endurance is like adding random death traps to the game, only for d-elves.

Because they climb. Everywhere. All the time. It's what elves do. It's their supposed advantage over mounted folk, their ability to just go up. But now it's even more dangerous, for no real reason that reflects game reality other than elves are supposed to be weaker against people in combat.

Your elf will fall. A lot. I've had master climb AI elves that randomly fall for no reason. It feels like there's a coded chance to fail climb, falling happens so much on characters that have long since 'ceased to fall.' And having less than 100 hp and climbing consistently is a death trap that I don't think is meant to be implemented by this change.

Solution: hard low cap of 101 hp. I don't personally care how much more the d-elf has than that. They could have a range of 101-111 and that's fine. But being able to mostly survive the falls you will have as part of your character (and then again ONLY if you're in good health and luck is on your side) is part of playing a d-elf. And surviving a fall doesn't even ensure survival - you'll likely be unconscious, waiting to wake up. So there's still a huge amount of danger present.

[Halaster]

How does the 'stat pool'/average sum of all stats of delves compare to humans and dwarves now?

It will exactly match the helpfile on elves when compared to humans.  "As compared to humans, elves have a higher agility (on average), and
a somewhat higher wisdom. Due to their light build, though, they are generally less strong and sturdy than humans."  Which has always been the intent of the race of elves.  They are wiser and more agil, but weaker and less sturdy, than humans.

[Brokkr]

re: climbing

Sorry, but master climb + high desert elf agi = no fail climb

And you have to remember, the point isn't "Desert elves always live."

[Nao]

re: climbing

Sorry, but master climb + high desert elf agi = no fail climb

And you have to remember, the point isn't "Desert elves always live."

An unintended side effect of this will be to have them dying like flies.

[LindseyBalboa]

re: climbing

Sorry, but master climb + high desert elf agi = no fail climb

And you have to remember, the point isn't "Desert elves always live."

I have fallen when I should not have, then, down a 4 story fall, but I'll concede that the room is desc'd as slippery. Maybe there was a penalty.

The point I made never said 'Desert elves always live.' It said 'they might have a chance at living if they haven't been injured recently and luck is in their corner.' And that's with 100+ hp. And that's unconscious, waiting for someone to kill you.

Why not make it more realistic for people riding mounts? Mounts should be able to trample you to death and kill you when they throw you. Horses do that, and the mounts on Arm a lot bigger. I assume that isn't the case because that's not that fun for a game to have. That is the territory this is going down.

[Halaster]

Why not make it more realistic for people riding mounts? Mounts should be able to trample you to death and kill you when they throw you. Horses do that, and the mounts on Arm a lot bigger. I assume that isn't the case because that's not that fun for a game to have. That is the territory this is going down.

This isn't a zero-sum issue.  We're not looking to change one group "to keep it even" because another group got changed.  We identified what we believed to be something "out of whack", and have corrected it (rather, will be, the change isn't live).   That doesn't mean some other race/group has to have an update to balance out the equation.

Now, if an idea is good, we'll consider implementing it on its own merits.

[Veselka]

Climb is reasonably easy to train up and your Pc would be silly to practice in potentially fatal climbs to start, and as Brokkr points out, add in desert elf agility and you should be fine.

If HP is the problem, I'd almost prefer keeping stamina and stun the same and add in a medium sized HP negative. But there are other factors with endurance that likely make sense to reduce the overall amount as well.

Overall I'm fine with it. Also fuck elves.

[roughneck]

This change needed to happen. Great move. It didn't make sense for delves to have more hp than most muls whike they weigh 7 stone at 7 ft tall.

A delf played to their strengths (stealth, mobility, ranged combat) will continue to dominate the wilderness more than any other race.

The only awkward piece is dangerous critters. It makes sense for a delf to use a bow to deal with dangerous game like desert spiders or even raptors. As-is, using a bow is silly unless you're relatively certain your PC can put down the critter 1-1 after rushes you. Bows should not be a means of initiating melee combat, they should he a means of avoiding it. Maybe have more critters flee instead of rush upon an arrow strike?

[Dar]

one thing to keep in mind. 

Desert elves bonus isn't only that they have higher stamina and less desert penalty, but also that they Regen the stamina faster. That, I theorize, was done via higher endurance?

in reality, whether you can move 10 rooms, or 20. If your stamina regens at the same rate as humans, it's all gonna be a major slog.

[LindseyBalboa]

Why not make it more realistic for people riding mounts? Mounts should be able to trample you to death and kill you when they throw you. Horses do that, and the mounts on Arm a lot bigger. I assume that isn't the case because that's not that fun for a game to have. That is the territory this is going down.

This isn't a zero-sum issue.  We're not looking to change one group "to keep it even" because another group got changed.  We identified what we believed to be something "out of whack", and have corrected it (rather, will be, the change isn't live).   That doesn't mean some other race/group has to have an update to balance out the equation.

Now, if an idea is good, we'll consider implementing it on its own merits.

bolding in my original quote done by me now. Wasn't suggesting the change, but using it as a tongue-in-cheek example of the change's affect to d-elves. I've spoken with Brokkr and my worry about pve/wilderness is assuaged until I go actually test out some new d-elves.

I also know staff will listen to feedback if there are serious issues but it will suck if that's the case for all the people that lost the 1 karma role they had (1 karma being 1 real life month of their real lives), so I definitely wanted to state my concerns re: survivability in pve/wilderness prior.

[Inks]

I'm fine with it. They will still have their movement bonuses anyway.

[Intuition]

Desert elves have always had much higher hp than they should according to the docs - so good job fixing it.

[eska]

1.  City elves and desert elves are the same race

This might have been the initial thought. But don't you forget the survival of the fittest and evolution in generations. Desert elves have been living in the desert for many generations. The weak dies and stronger ones keep reproducing. It is very understandable that city elves and desert elves could be different from another. RL example can be seen on humans as well. Humans living in different regions of the world evolved physically differently.

[Tipsie]

Guess we'll just have to see the change and see how bad it affects d-elves..

[Doublepalli]

Then make stealth actually cost less than 4 mv per room. Right now. It is EXPENSIVE to stealth in the desert. It's a /chore/. So it doesn't happen. I mean, who can keep up with riders, who also can stop and rest at any given moment? Not the one losing alot of wind just to walk room by room. Who will have to rest before the riders and break stealth. As a player of elves who consistently have less than 90 hp, both delf and cell, I don't think we need to reduce their HP even further. They are durable wasteland survivors. If we do this change, how will it effect stamina and HP regen?

[Wday]

Most elves in the last few years played haven't been able to wear clothes or carry a quiver of arrows with how weak they are.  I fear this will make them completely pitiful, maybe neat if Stam was really boosted so can run forever or added strength so can use common items.

[Halaster]

As a player of elves who consistently have less than 90 hp, both delf and cell, I don't think we need to reduce their HP even further. They are durable wasteland survivors. If we do this change, how will it effect stamina and HP regen?

It's pretty uncommon to see a desert with below 100 hp currently, unless they're playing young.  The only ones I've seen sub 100 are because they chose to be really really young (seriously, y'all, young age just decimates your stats), dumpstat'd endurance, or just had a stroke of really bad luck.  The change is expected to be about 10-ish hps less on average.  Based on how many hps most desert elves have now, most of them will still remain above 100 after the change.

Based on how much stamina we plan to add vs how much will be lost from the endurance change, it will be a net gain in stamina.  On average new desert elves will be gaining more stamina than they are losing hps.

[Riev]

Most elves in the last few years played haven't been able to wear clothes or carry a quiver of arrows with how weak they are.  I fear this will make them completely pitiful, maybe neat if Stam was really boosted so can run forever or added strength so can use common items.

I'd say "most" is anecdotal at best, and you can certainly run around at MANAGEABLE weight if you want to. You just don't want to. Elf strength is a different topic, but weapon skills and offense can help overcome it.

less than 10% reduction in HP for a boost in natural stamina sounds like a good tradeoff.

I would be on board for 'sneak' not costing so much stam per room, though.

[Nao]

Elf strength is a different topic, but weapon skills and offense can help overcome it.

Elf str is relevant because it's so low that you can't wear a whole lot of armor unless you happen to roll really high.

This got worse with the armor revamp a few years ago. The Two Moons had just opened and came with a cool set of armor made by the tribe. Not even a full set, I think they didn't have a helmet or neckgear. But with the armor revamp and standardization, this armor meant to be specifically for elves became too heavy. I don't think any of the PCs in the tribe kept wearing the full set.

[Riev]

This topic is about endurance changes, not Elf Strength. I didn't say it wasn't important, but it isn't relevant to the topic.

[Shalooonsh]

Most elves in the last few years played haven't been able to wear clothes or carry a quiver of arrows with how weak they are.  I fear this will make them completely pitiful, maybe neat if Stam was really boosted so can run forever or added strength so can use common items.

Categorically false.  As someone who has watched most of the elves in the last few years they've been able to wear clothes, armor, and carry choice of weapon with a backup just fine... as long as they don't try to play like a dwarf.  If you're a d-elf, and you try to play like a c-dwarf, you're going to have a bad time.

[Armaddict]

Categorically false.  As someone who has watched most of the elves in the last few years they've been able to wear clothes, armor, and carry choice of weapon with a backup just fine... as long as they don't try to play like a dwarf.  If you're a d-elf, and you try to play like a c-dwarf, you're going to have a bad time.

Just wanted to kind of add to this; you really shouldn't pick an elf to wear decked out armors.  As someone who almost always plays elves, I don't go in looking for all the cool armors I can wear.  I have a few select pieces of leather that I like to try to find, or replacements for those, but most elves are usually looking for good quality utility-based gear rather than heavy armor.  I depend on planning and agility, which is why the encumbrance game plays such a large part.

If you go in with the belief that you should be able to carry everything all the time for every situation, you aren't playing according to the elven state.  I'm running <here> to <do this>, which means I need to bring <this> and <this>.  Do I need to bring a tent?  Do I need to bring a lot of water?  No?  I need to ditch those things to travel light.  This is like in RL when you are planning a backpacking trip; you are -planning- on your method of travel being on foot, and you decide which items are worth bringing, what's worth wearing, and how you can maximize preparation while minimizing the idea for a cart or frequent rests.  If you're making a -big trip-, that's the time where they consider pack animals.

Indeed, not being able to carry everything can result in some bad situations, but that is the elven mindset in the first place.  They have a superiority complex for a reason.  Every day they make decisions based on preparation and survival, and if they live long enough, they are -extremely confident- in their mental process.

[titansfan]

I think a hard lock at 100 hp should be a thing.  Lower than that usually just blows and makes a character incredibly difficult to play in a fun way if you had combat in your plans at all. Yes, I know.  After 10 days played you can be just as tough,  blah blah. It's not fun to get there terrified of everything and if other players aren't around to protect you as you get gud.

[Halaster]

I think a hard lock at 100 hp should be a thing.  Lower than that usually just blows and makes a character incredibly difficult to play in a fun way if you had combat in your plans at all. Yes, I know.  After 10 days played you can be just as tough,  blah blah. It's not fun to get there terrified of everything and if other players aren't around to protect you as you get gud.

Humans and city elves have been dealing with that basically forever.  I've played several human combat characters in the low 90's, and did just fine, and had a lot of fun.

[Lotion]

if you are so unsatisfied with your stat rolls that you want to create a new character then just go full yolo
if you die then you get to create a new character
if you survive then you now have a badass character

[Nao]

I think a hard lock at 100 hp should be a thing.  Lower than that usually just blows and makes a character incredibly difficult to play in a fun way if you had combat in your plans at all. Yes, I know.  After 10 days played you can be just as tough,  blah blah. It's not fun to get there terrified of everything and if other players aren't around to protect you as you get gud.

Humans and city elves have been dealing with that basically forever.  I've played several human combat characters in the low 90's, and did just fine, and had a lot of fun.

Humans and city elves live in a much safer environment and have the choice to avoid or limit contact with aggressive NPCs until they have skilled up a bit (or in the case of city elves, never have to go outside). Delves don't have that luxury, they don't get to wear as much armor as the average human, and get dropped in some very dangerous locations right after chargen. They already had a very high turnover rate from simply dying even before this change, and now they're even less likely to survive.

Coded human tribals may be the exception here, but they're a pretty small minority and still seem to hang around in settlements more than most delves.

[Halaster]

Delves don't have that luxury, they don't get to wear as much armor as the average human, and get dropped in some very dangerous locations right after chargen. They already had a very high turnover rate from simply dying even before this change, and now they're even less likely to survive.

Them's the breaks when you live in the wilderness vs civilization.  ArmageddonMUD is set in a "harsh, post-apocalyptic desert world", it's going to be tough outside of the cities, which is where desert elves live.

[Veselka]

Agreed.

[Nao]

Delves don't have that luxury, they don't get to wear as much armor as the average human, and get dropped in some very dangerous locations right after chargen. They already had a very high turnover rate from simply dying even before this change, and now they're even less likely to survive.

Them's the breaks when you live in the wilderness vs civilization.  ArmageddonMUD is set in a "harsh, post-apocalyptic desert world", it's going to be tough outside of the cities, which is where desert elves live.

It was already tougher in the wilderness.

You could use that argument to ramp up the danger level indefinitely (ridiculous example: let's make every mob a mek), even to the point where it is no longer okay or playable. It's a bad argument.

The wilderness has only been getting more and more dangerous recently. NPCs move around more,  so why the need to sharply ramp up difficulty even more, but only for delves? It's not like they've been dominating the game and outshining every other race.

I don't even die a lot, I'm on PC #24 and none of my recent deaths would have been prevented by having a few more hp. But it's frustrating as hell to see everyone in your clan drop left and right from falls or unlucky raptor encounters. It kills continuity and it kills plots. We need some longevity and consistency with PCs. Half of your clan dying every few weeks is not healthy. Most PCs not surviving past a couple of weeks is not healthy.

There seems to be a tendency where new PCs get ignored because chances are they won't be there in two weeks. It drives away new and returning players when nobody wants to interact with them. It's frustrating to players of existing PCs that do interact, but never see most of these PCs again.

[Riev]

Correct me if I'm wrong (I'm never wrong, come at me):

Desert elves require karma, or a 0-karma special application. The idea being... you've had a few characters in the game, and understand the world and at a base level, how dangerous it is.

If you're rolling an elf and running around the Wastelands totally unprepared, alone, and dying to meks and bahamets and big ass kryl... I think you weren't ready for the role. Or, at the least, are too excited and not taking the world seriously enough.

I know its an old trope, but I think of desert elves like native americans or at least middle eastern desert clans. Going out alone is a bad idea and most hunting is done in groups.

The endurance change isn't whats killing elves. Opening all the tribes and the influx of a bunch of players into them is killing them. People trying a clan, or a part of the world they've never been in, is killing them.

10-15 less HP is not killing you.

[Nao]

If you're rolling an elf and running around the Wastelands totally unprepared, alone, and dying to meks and bahamets and big ass kryl... I think you weren't ready for the role. Or, at the least, are too excited and not taking the world seriously enough.

With a new delf, it's not meks and bahamets and kryl (though you do get unlucky and end up in combat with those when you're not looking for it). For a new scout or stalker PC with 92 hp, things like gortoks, cilops, raptors, scrabs with a high stat roll, or a single spider are serious threats. Especially in the north you might run from one of those injured, and run into two more while you're fleeing. God forbid if you went with stalker. A stalker delf shouldn't be borderline unplayable, or forced to skill up somewhere far away from their camp because it's safer to spend your first few days played there. Stalker is the most thematic class for a delf IMO, but it's borderline suicidal at this point.

I know its an old trope, but I think of desert elves like native americans or at least middle eastern desert clans. Going out alone is a bad idea and most hunting is done in groups.

Not always an option with the current numbers, unless you enjoy sitting alone at camp for most of your playtime. And even then, you might eventually have to leave because hunger/thirst are a thing.

10-15 less HP is not killing you.

It's exacerbating a pre-existing problem and introduces other issues like lowered poison resistance for elves that live in scorpion, angkh, and cilops country.

[betweenford]

Some of their camps are 1-3 tiles too close to things that can in fact bash you right off the bat and kill you. Even if you know tbe game world, very few people expect to walk right outside camp and meet a dujat/anakore/braxat/spider/mekillot/bahamet/carru literally right outside of camp. Thats not even related to being cautious or being unprepared. Thats just unlucky animal wandering or animal spawns.

[Fawcett]

If you're rolling an elf and running around the Wastelands totally unprepared, alone, and dying to meks and bahamets and big ass kryl... I think you weren't ready for the role. Or, at the least, are too excited and not taking the world seriously enough.

I know its an old trope, but I think of desert elves like native americans or at least middle eastern desert clans. Going out alone is a bad idea and most hunting is done in groups.

Hard to get a group/pack when all your tribemates are dead in under a week because they stepped out of camp to forage a tuber.

Overall, I think this change is pretty harmful, and people really underestimate just how severe losing 10-20 max HP can be. The optimal build was an AI strength dwarf, and now this optimal build just gets better and better with recent changes.

It doesn't make the world harsher and grittier, it just makes one of the most unique parts of Arm very hard to pull off unless you go complete twink mode in order to get past the first few stages of dying to basically anything as a delf.

[Brokkr]

  If you are choosing not to use sneak/hide to survive these situations, I do not know what to tell you.

[Nao]

  If you are choosing not to use sneak/hide to survive these situations, I do not know what to tell you.

Delves have to play a few days to skill that up before it's even remotely reliable - just like everyone else.

Also, are you suggesting that they sneak/hide everywhere instead of running? Because that would be the only way to avoid these critters that appear out of nowhere, from diagonal directions.

[betweenford]

  If you are choosing not to use sneak/hide to survive these situations, I do not know what to tell you.

Are you suggesting a desert elf train their sneak and hide in their camp before they walk one tile away from their camp to see a spider for the first time?

Or are you suggesting a desert elf use their novice sneak and hide to get past that brick red tarantula?

[Riev]

Personally, as callous as it makes me seem:
If you're playing a 0-day elf and engaging gortok, your HP isn't the problem.

I just don't see how 10 less HP is whats killing you. I don't play a LOT of outdoor characters but there's a progression.

Anecdote: I've lost a LOT of low-play-time outdoors characters to duskhorn because bull duskhorn hit REAL hard in the head and can knock you out. This is not because my endurance sucks or my HP is bad. This is because I wasn't ready or prepared for that encounter.

Not that anyone has anything to prove to me, but I'd want to see more reasons why that 10hp is why you died and not because you messed up. Show me how you would have lived with 8hp.

[Fawcett]

Personally, as callous as it makes me seem:
If you're playing a 0-day elf and engaging gortok, your HP isn't the problem.

I just don't see how 10 less HP is whats killing you. I don't play a LOT of outdoor characters but there's a progression.

Anecdote: I've lost a LOT of low-play-time outdoors characters to duskhorn because bull duskhorn hit REAL hard in the head and can knock you out. This is not because my endurance sucks or my HP is bad. This is because I wasn't ready or prepared for that encounter.

Not that anyone has anything to prove to me, but I'd want to see more reasons why that 10hp is why you died and not because you messed up. Show me how you would have lived with 8hp.

Maybe I play alot of outdoorsy characters, but I've had it happen more then once.

Example:
Bahamet runs in out of nowhere as I'm foraging roots, and I get unlucky because it attacks my PC instantly. Or my game lagged. It hits me for 85 damage/stun on the head, and I manage to flee with 15 hp left.

If I was an elf, I would've probably had hp in the low 80s. AKA, dead.

Novice sneak/hide would not have helped out there and this happens aaaaaalll the time on any new outdoors character. Insanely powerful creature runs in from the west, you manage to flee with HP in the tens or single digits.

But instead of fleeing, you die. That is what 10-20 HP less does for an entire race.

[Nao]

Personally, as callous as it makes me seem:
If you're playing a 0-day elf and engaging gortok, your HP isn't the problem.

I just don't see how 10 less HP is whats killing you. I don't play a LOT of outdoor characters but there's a progression.

Anecdote: I've lost a LOT of low-play-time outdoors characters to duskhorn because bull duskhorn hit REAL hard in the head and can knock you out. This is not because my endurance sucks or my HP is bad. This is because I wasn't ready or prepared for that encounter.

Not that anyone has anything to prove to me, but I'd want to see more reasons why that 10hp is why you died and not because you messed up. Show me how you would have lived with 8hp.

Have you played in the wilderness over the last year or so, since the NPCs started to wander more?

Critters no longer stay in the places you expect them to be. They chase each other and can end up pretty far from the spawn point (hello, mek in the tablelands). There are no safe gortok or duskhorn-free areas where you can follow the progression and skill up on hawks or vultures only. You might be able to find some, but you also might have to get past the some more dangerous critters to even get there.

[Brokkr]

Have you actually encountered a Mek in the Tablelands?

Cause like...mek and bahamet are the most predictable out of everything.

[Riev]

Personally, as callous as it makes me seem:
If you're playing a 0-day elf and engaging gortok, your HP isn't the problem.

I just don't see how 10 less HP is whats killing you. I don't play a LOT of outdoor characters but there's a progression.

Anecdote: I've lost a LOT of low-play-time outdoors characters to duskhorn because bull duskhorn hit REAL hard in the head and can knock you out. This is not because my endurance sucks or my HP is bad. This is because I wasn't ready or prepared for that encounter.

Not that anyone has anything to prove to me, but I'd want to see more reasons why that 10hp is why you died and not because you messed up. Show me how you would have lived with 8hp.

Maybe I play alot of outdoorsy characters, but I've had it happen more then once.

Example:
Bahamet runs in out of nowhere as I'm foraging roots, and I get unlucky because it attacks my PC instantly. Or my game lagged. It hits me for 85 damage/stun on the head, and I manage to flee with 15 hp left.

If I was an elf, I would've probably had hp in the low 80s. AKA, dead.

Novice sneak/hide would not have helped out there and this happens aaaaaalll the time on any new outdoors character. Insanely powerful creature runs in from the west, you manage to flee with HP in the tens or single digits.

But instead of fleeing, you die. That is what 10-20 HP less does for an entire race.

I would say you hit the luck zone then, more often than not. Because hitting for that much damage in one hit should reel you and give a bit of lag. Plus it sounds like you succeeded at fleeing and weren't hit as you ran away.

Plus as Halaster said:
Based on how many hps most desert elves have now, most of them will still remain above 100 after the change.

Part of this is "Riev doesn't play elves so he doesn't really care" but a big part of it is... if you consistently have sub-80hp then you are dumpstatting endurance and refusing to use things in game that can bring it up.

[Halaster]

Stepping outside camp directly into a dangerous creature is a problem, agreed.  It's nothing to do with maybe 10 less hp on average, though.  Maybe some camps need to be moved around a little.

[Nao]

Have you actually encountered a Mek in the Tablelands?

Cause like...mek and bahamet are the most predictable out of everything.

Yes. It should be in my pfile with the exact room because my PC died to that mek. I think the mek chased a jozhal or another NPC and fell off the shield wall some time before my PC also fell off the shield wall.

This death was entirely my own fault and sort of hilarious. The point here is simply that some of these critters end up a long way from where you expect them to be now.

[Brokkr]

Have you actually encountered a Mek in the Tablelands?

Cause like...mek and bahamet are the most predictable out of everything.

Yes. It should be in my pfile with the exact room because my PC died to that mek. I think the mek chased a jozhal or another NPC and fell off the shield wall some time before my PC also fell off the shield wall.

This death was entirely my own fault and sort of hilarious. The point here is simply that some of these critters end up a long way from where you expect them to be now.

Weird, it should have pathed back to the Salt Flats from there.

[Riev]

PC was tastier.

Probably still wouldn't have survived with 10 more HP.

[huntsforblood]

Just reimburse karma if you die before the end of your 2nd day played with a karma character.

No back-to-backs, though, so if you die again on the next character right away, bad luck. Prevents suicides/re-rolls.

If you're not ready to go survive in the wild by 2 days played, your character was not going to survive anyway.

That little bit would be enough to offset the insane real life annoyance of karma regen, in my mind, which is a nice bonus.

Hell 1 day played should be enough to get hide to advanced on a d-elf without doing anything except occasionally hiding.

[Armaddict]

Just a couple things.


I'm not sure whether it was in here or on discord, but there's been a lot of talk of '10 hp less in the desert is a death sentence.'  However, I'm going to quickly ask you to go over the number of times you've -actually- been at less than 10 hitpoints where you were not otherwise screwed in some other way (i.e. Out of stamina, etc).  That number is...incredibly small, or should be, anyway.  If that's a high number, I have a suggestion following.  The point being, the number of times having 10 less hp screws you is actually pretty small in most cases, and this is why I've survived well enough with hp in the 80's; most of the time Armageddon doesn't screw you with brute force, it screws you with circumstance. 

Someone earlier said that city-elves don't have to deal with the same things that desert elves do, and that makes their lower hp for comparison irrelevant; I'd like to ask you whether or not you'd rather have less hp out in the desert fighting npc's, or whether you'd like to have less hp in a place where you fight less (skill up less), are not generally expected or 'allowed' to have weapons out and ready, and your aggressors are generally people who usually have strength prioritized (like most of us) who attack you out of nowhere when your weapons are put away.  Less hp is far more disadvantageous in that scenario, and yet it's entirely survivable. (ETA: Not to mention backstabs.)

Now, the suggestion:  What lower hp -actually- impacts is the number of hp you -should- treat as '0'.  My number for this is 60% of my maximum hit points; There is almost no scenario in the game where it is worth pushing that number in order to have to sleep to regain it.  Dropping 10 hp drops that threshold by 4hp.  In other words, if I have 100 hp, 60hp is what I treat as 0.  If I have 90hp, 56hp is treated as 0.  That's not -when I flee-. That number is treated, in my head, as when I am -dead-.  It's not a line worth playing with.  If something is hitting you well enough to push you towards that boundary, then run early.  If something knocks you near it in one shot, run immediately.  Do not treat actual combat, whether against PC's or NPC's, city or desert, like you treat sparring matches.  That's not max hp screwing you over, that's just not treating wounds like they matter.

It makes PvP encounters better anyway.  Short, intense fights that devolve into hunting and prey.  Not long drawn out slogs through 100 hit points of damage where you're just -hoping- you get big hits.

[Brytta Léofa]

bro here dropping wisdom like it's a dump stat.

[najdorf]

Just a couple things.


I'm not sure whether it was in here or on discord, but there's been a lot of talk of '10 hp less in the desert is a death sentence.'  However, I'm going to quickly ask you to go over the number of times you've -actually- been at less than 10 hitpoints where you were not otherwise screwed in some other way (i.e. Out of stamina, etc).  That number is...incredibly small, or should be, anyway.  If that's a high number, I have a suggestion following.  The point being, the number of times having 10 less hp screws you is actually pretty small in most cases, and this is why I've survived well enough with hp in the 80's; most of the time Armageddon doesn't screw you with brute force, it screws you with circumstance. 

Someone earlier said that city-elves don't have to deal with the same things that desert elves do, and that makes their lower hp for comparison irrelevant; I'd like to ask you whether or not you'd rather have less hp out in the desert fighting npc's, or whether you'd like to have less hp in a place where you fight less (skill up less), are not generally expected or 'allowed' to have weapons out and ready, and your aggressors are generally people who usually have strength prioritized (like most of us) who attack you out of nowhere when your weapons are put away.  Less hp is far more disadvantageous in that scenario, and yet it's entirely survivable. (ETA: Not to mention backstabs.)

Now, the suggestion:  What lower hp -actually- impacts is the number of hp you -should- treat as '0'.  My number for this is 60% of my maximum hit points; There is almost no scenario in the game where it is worth pushing that number in order to have to sleep to regain it.  Dropping 10 hp drops that threshold by 4hp.  In other words, if I have 100 hp, 60hp is what I treat as 0.  If I have 90hp, 56hp is treated as 0.  That's not -when I flee-. That number is treated, in my head, as when I am -dead-.  It's not a line worth playing with.  If something is hitting you well enough to push you towards that boundary, then run early.  If something knocks you near it in one shot, run immediately.  Do not treat actual combat, whether against PC's or NPC's, city or desert, like you treat sparring matches.  That's not max hp screwing you over, that's just not treating wounds like they matter.

It makes PvP encounters better anyway.  Short, intense fights that devolve into hunting and prey.  Not long drawn out slogs through 100 hit points of damage where you're just -hoping- you get big hits.

I'm not arguing about OP, just answering your question.
I have been there over 10 or so times with 10+ days characters.
Whoever raise their concern here probably do NOT mind the hp chipping in a combat, where they can of course flee.
There are 2 major concerns where 105 to 95 hp matters:
a) fall from a 3 room climb fail
b)
       .---.
       |---|
       |---|
       |---|
  .---^ - ^---.
:___________:
      |  |//|
      |  |//|
      |  |//|
      |  |//|
      |  |//|
      |  |//|
      |  |.- |
      |.-'**|
       \***/
        \*/
         V

[Dar]

in all honesty.  Aside the elven endurance, or whatever.


what should staff take a second and third look at is

The lethality of climbing, considering how prevalent it is in a gameplay.

The pros and cons of 'anything' non solely specialized (ie. backstab sap, poison) to end a fight in one round.  In terms of gameplay and storytelling aspects.

[Veselka]

From my understanding, camps are on a coded rotation for the most part between a few different anchor points.

Being that most of the tribes are nomadic, I think it would be a cool constant 'side quest' to scout for new habitable locations for the tribe.

This meaning to say -- Your PC Tribemembers are always on the look out for new locations, where maybe fewer nasty beasties roam close by, or there is a resource that is valuable nearby, etc.

They put this forward to their Staff after coming to a group consensus, and one of the 'rotation points' is moved to that spot.

In order to avoid getting all the best spots, they have to constantly rotate. You could have one location that is an anchor point and doesn't get moved out of the rotation. This would be the 'Home Base' location. To outsiders it would be 'The place that <insert tribe> comes to about once a year for trade'. The others would be more malleable, and provide a bit of player input/staff input to move them around.

This is entirely separate from the endurance discussion, but I was seeing mention of 'walking out of camp and getting carru'd' as a common thread. I think it's realistic within even our world to set up camp and find out 'well shit we're in the middle of bison country' and decide to move, even if it's difficult, to another location. It's all within reason too -- It's Zalanthas, it's the wastes, so there is always going to be a considerable amount of danger even nomadically.

It's part of what you gain by being a City Folk compared to Wilderness Folk, and it was also a major theme of Dark Sun -- The City is relatively safe, especially from hostile, aggressive, often fatal encounters with creatures, raiders, and the elements. In exchange, you have to deal with <insert brutal Sorcerer King regime here>. If you can't stomach that, or if you are a part of a tribe, you brave the very challenging wastes to eke out a life outside of the crushing weight of Templars and "Civilization".

And if anything...Dark Sun as a comparison, Zalanthas is EASY PEASY. The desert in Dark Sun is quite literally fatal unless you are traveling in a caravan, and even then, you might be waylaid and enslaved or eaten along the way. So I consider many of the dangers of the Zalanthan Desert fatal to those without experience or wherewithal, but semi-predictable and avoidable for those with experience and skill.

[Knight of Knives]

I've been at sub 10 a lot. And in circumstances where you can't flee or outrun whatever, it matters a lot.

So 10 hp certainly does make a difference.

[Armaddict]

I've been at sub 10 a lot. And in circumstances where you can't flee or outrun whatever, it matters a lot.

So 10 hp certainly does make a difference.

So does being cautious.  That's the whole point.  I'm sorry, but you can bump that number up to 20, and it's still a complete rarity for anyone having the mentality I already described.  You're pushing fights too hard and -creating- the circumstance.  You're purposely fighting, not avoiding, the things that might kill you.  I don't know whether this is due to skill-gain pursuit, a lack of learning from mistakes, or the absolute worst luck in the world, but the only encounters that put me at low hp other than death are ones where I'm allowing it on purpose (only to realize how stupid I was after, i.e. 'Sure, I'll try a Carru even though I'm not that good'), or against players who can and will create the circumstances of death intelligently.

I think more of you than just being helpless to it, which means you're acknowledging the risks, then taking them, but then claiming that there's no way to avoid them.  10hp makes a difference, but not in terms of lethality; the rng required for it to save you, requires that it shave it off of something doing giant hits on you, in which case the hp ain't the issue.  What it does impact is that is that 4hp threshold.  You have 4 less hp to 'live in' with relative low risk.

Reiterating the 'in situations where you can't flee or outrun whatever' are exactly what is meant by circumstance fucking you, not the hp.  If you need 10 more hp because you can't outrun something, it ain't the hp fucking you.  And it's certainly not going to be what saves you.

[Master Color]

If this was 2010, I might agree. But there have been enough changes to wildlife, making them more deadly and much more prone to information asymmetries.

I don't know how newer players can be expected to survive even close to camp with some of these mobs. HP is just a tiny safety net that might help them survive through the wet paper towel phase of the character.

[Armaddict]

If this was 2010, I might agree. But there have been enough changes to wildlife, making them more deadly and much more prone to information asymmetries.

I don't know how newer players can be expected to survive even close to camp with some of these mobs. HP is just a tiny safety net that might help them survive through the wet paper towel phase of the character.

I mean...I don't expect new players to survive right off the bat.  It's a hard game.  Veterans still die.  I don't just boot up survival games and get mad if I die immediately because they didn't make it completely survivable right out of the gates, that's kind of the point.  We die, we learn.  The permadeath aspect of the game has somehow made characters feel like they should be permanent.  Hell, I usually have to restart city-builders because I 'die' by making critical planning mistakes.

10 hp still is NOT the deciding factor in those scenarios.

[Nao]

I've had 10 PCs since May 2018 playtesting for the new classes started.

3 died to PK/templar'd, 3 to megafauna that I did NOT seek out, one died to a spider pile after the change that made them give chase, two were stored and one is my current.

I've searched the logs for instances when I ended up with very low hp. Of those 10 PCs, 3 were in situations where they had hp in the single digits or negative HP, but lived. Another one lived with 16hp. One would likely have survived the situation that led to his death with 10 more hp (arrow to -5 just as I was about to get away with <redacted>).

So yeah, I don't think 10-15 hp are as inconsequential as you all make it out to be.

[Riev]

So yeah, I don't think 10-15 hp are as inconsequential as you all make it out to be.

Conversely, I don't think its as consequential as you make it out to be.
We can all come up with "but this one time" scenarios all we want. I can make up whatever information I want.

At this point its screaming into the void.

[Nao]

So yeah, I don't think 10-15 hp are as inconsequential as you all make it out to be.

Conversely, I don't think its as consequential as you make it out to be.
We can all come up with "but this one time" scenarios all we want. I can make up whatever information I want.

At this point its screaming into the void.

If you're just going to assume that any examples were made up, then why did you ask for those? I literally ran a regex search over all my logs, this is the result.

[Armaddict]

If you're just going to assume that any examples were made up, then why did you ask for those? I literally ran a regex search over all my logs, this is the result.

He didn't.  I did.  And I didn't ask for examples.  I asked you to examine it yourself.  You have freakishly weird luck, or a certain sort of decision making.  In 20 years of play, this is a scenario that has happened to me a handful of times.  Interestingly, the 'IF' clause of the same post was ignored, which was the examination of -why- those situations are more or less likely to happen, and IF they are happening often...

You sir, are either freakishly magnetic for bad circumstantial luck, or have found a way to normalize circumstance in your play.  Whatever the case, you can continue down the path of 'This is a bad change because I might die more' or 'I don't want to play that anymore if risks are higher', but I don't think that will have much impact on it.  I'd urge you to examine why for you (and others), this appears that it will have a giant effect, while for others it has meant almost nil as far as how survival capability is found.  There is one viewpoint in that examination in particular that would be ironic, but we'll see if it goes that way.

[Nao]

He didn't.  I did.  And I didn't ask for examples.  I asked you to examine it yourself.  You have freakishly weird luck, or a certain sort of decision making.  In 20 years of play, this is a scenario that has happened to me a handful of times.  Interestingly, the 'IF' clause of the same post was ignored, which was the examination of -why- those situations are more or less likely to happen, and IF they are happening often...

You sir, are either freakishly magnetic for bad circumstantial luck, or have found a way to normalize circumstance in your play.  Whatever the case, you can continue down the path of 'This is a bad change because I might die more' or 'I don't want to play that anymore if risks are higher', but I don't think that will have much impact on it.  I'd urge you to examine why for you (and others), this appears that it will have a giant effect, while for others it has meant almost nil as far as how survival capability is found.  There is one viewpoint in that examination in particular that would be ironic, but we'll see if it goes that way.

Riev asked on page 3.

I think it has something to do with playing PCs that start out in the wilderness, playing those 0-day PCs relatively recently, and playing in certain areas of the game world. I played in the first batch of Two Moon PCs when the clan first opened, and the turnover was nowhere near what I'm seeing with the current batch of delves. Most of them managed to stay alive for quite a while.

Most of the current batch apped in before the endurance change, so I think different danger levels in the wilderness are to blame. The north is more dangerous than the south now, and there have been code changes to ramp up the difficulty over the last few years. Most people that played in Morin's before Tuluk reopened would be aware of this. But you won't notice if you don't play there, and you might not notice if you only get out there once you've skilled up some. But starting out in that area as a new PC is just one "oh shit, that was risky af" experience after another.

I think I'm a pretty careful player. 7 deaths in five years is not a lot. I'm less worried about dying and more worried about having no one to play with because people die from being so damn fragile, say "fuck this, I'll go play somewhere else instead", or even just "whelp, I'm out of karma now, can't try again even if I want to" and the newfound interest in delf roles dies as quickly as it started.

[Armaddict]

To be clear, since text conversations always make me come across a certain way.  I'm not trying to attack you or call you a liar.  I -am- trying to provide insight in my own experience about how things can be adjusted for people to deal with this change.  I'm one of those players who hates sparring, watching people cycle through all their weapons and combat skills while we mindlessly swing until someone loses a certain amount of hitpoints where I -never- push my hunts to that degree.  I hate watching people take on fights they don't need just because it's a creature that gives them a challenge.

I am someone who enjoys wilderness characters because every decision I make can potentially lead to death.  Whether that be to run instead of sneak, to dismount and stealth my way to something or ride right through dangerous territory and depend on speed, to hunt this creature where I need something it gives me despite it being in an area where this baddy is sometimes found.  And I lose characters.  And I've lost a lot of characters.  Wilderness characters are, inevitably, shorter lived, particularly when they aren't returning to cities.  But those deaths are almost always directly correlated to some decision I've made.  And every death is some sort of learning experience about things that I, the player, choose to do.

Ultimately though, part of the big deal may be that despite how careful I talk about being here, and how I treat hp, and how generally my death scenarios are not dependent on hitpoints...I also just view death as part of this game.  Permadeath doesn't mean permacharacter.  They're made to die, and it's my own choosing on what manners of death their story ends in.  Wilderness dooms you to the strong possibility of a sudden NPC death versus the plots and betrayals and deeper social stories of cities.  My posts here have been trying to reflect on how some hunters are versus how others are, and I've found if you spend -a lot of time- in the wilds, there's really no need to engage in many common behaviors.  Risk still happens all over the place.  Death is still around every corner.  I don't need to tempt it, I just hunt for food off of easy fights, try to stay safe, and so on.  There's no need to tempt it or risk it when the game itself wants you dead.